MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Capacity to monitor severe maternal morbidity in Australia

2008· article· en· W2004231074 on OpenAlex
Wendy Pollock, Elizabeth Sullivan, Sioban Nelson, James F. King

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal and fetal healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLaggingMedicineMaternal morbidityMaternal healthMaternal deathPregnancyEnvironmental healthIntensive care medicineHealth servicesPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Maternal mortality has traditionally been the key element in the monitoring of maternal health and adequacy of obstetric services in Australia and around the world. In developed countries, the ability of maternal mortality to serve this purpose is reduced because of the rarity of maternal mortality, reflected in very low maternal mortality ratios. Internationally, there has been increasing interest in severe maternal morbidity as an indicator to monitor maternal health and maternity services. The aim of this paper is to critically examine the capacity to measure and monitor maternal morbidity in Australia. There is a paucity of reliable maternal morbidity data in Australia; Australia is lagging behind peer countries that are endeavouring to monitor severe maternal morbidity. Dedicated efforts and adequate resources are needed in order to monitor severe maternal morbidity in Australia.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.439

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.081
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.233 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it